Tekst analizira značenje i razumijevanje pojma governance te njegov prijevod na hrvatski jezik. Vlade, izvršne vlasti, vladajući (governing) pristupom odozgo, izdavanjem naloga i kontroliranjem, odnosno upravljanjem, ne mogu se učinkovito i djelotvorno nositi s problemima i izazovima. Kako bi odgovorile na takve izazove, vlade prihvaćaju vladanje odozdo, po horizontalnom načelu suradnje s ostalim dionicima, pa su onda u prilici mobilizirati raspoložive resurse, izgraditi povjerenje i novu mrežu suradnje te razviti koncept vladavine (governance). Koncept dobre vladavine u Europskoj uniji je alat kojim se jačaju procesi konvergencije. Istraživanja o vladavini u Hrvatskoj su rijetka, a radovi o toj temi uglavnom analiziraju vladavinu, dobru vladavinu i višerazinsku vladavinu kao novu upravnu doktrinu. Imajući u vidu značenje pojma governance u engleskom jeziku te njegovo značenje u odnosu na druge pojmove, drži se da ga na hrvatski jezik treba prevoditi kao vladavina. Analizira se i značenje pojmova: affordability, social entrepreneurship, eligibility i resilience te se predlaže prevođenje na hrvatski jezik. ; The paper analyses the meaning and understanding of the term governance and its translation into Croatian. Governments, executive authorities, governing in a top-down approach, issuing orders, and controlling, administering, cannot effectively and efficiently deal with the problems and challenges. To meet such challenges, governments accept bottom-up governance, based on the horizontal principle of cooperation with other stakeholders, which enables them to mobilize available resources, build the trust and a new network of cooperation, and develop the concept of governance. The concept of good governance in the European Union is a tool that strengthens convergence processes. Research on the implementation of the concept of governance in Croatia is rare, and papers mainly analyse governance, good governance, and multilevel governance as a new administrative doctrine. Having in mind the meaning of the term governance in English, and its meaning in relation to other terms, it is held that it should be translated into Croatian as vladavina, not as upravljanje. In addition, the meaning of the terms: affordability, social entrepreneurship, eligibility, and resilience are analysed and the terms for their translation into Croatian are proposed.
One of the most significant results of European convergence is an increase in the number of channels for the "European" policy activities of subnational actors. These actors are no longer limited to bilateral political relations & national i.e. state actors, but are to cooperate & communicate with different actors in different arenas of decision-making & make use of various channels of influencing the European policy process. The question of subnational mobilization has become extremely significant in the theory of European convergence, particularly following the major reform of the EU cohesion policy of 1988 & the introduction of the partnership principle. In that sense, the mobilization of subnational actors is closely linked to the evolution of the EU cohesion policy. Tt should be noted that despite this, the EU cohesion policy is primarily the essential catalyst of subnational mobilization & thus not "exclusively" linked to the public policy realm; it has increasingly become a prominent feature of other public-policy areas. And finally, hand in hand with the elaboration of the common cohesion policy (related to subnational mobilization) the concept of the so-called multilevel governance was formulated in the context of the European integration, in the sense of identifying the environment in which the processes of the formation & the implementation of common European policies are today taking place. Figures, References. Adapted from the source document.
One of the most significant results of European convergence is an increase in the number of channels for the "European" policy activities of subnational actors. These actors are no longer limited to bilateral political relations & national i.e. state actors, but are to cooperate & communicate with different actors in different arenas of decision-making & make use of various channels of influencing the European policy process. The question of subnational mobilization has become extremely significant in the theory of European convergence, particularly following the major reform of the EU cohesion policy of 1988 & the introduction of the partnership principle. In that sense, the mobilization of subnational actors is closely linked to the evolution of the EU cohesion policy. Tt should be noted that despite this, the EU cohesion policy is primarily the essential catalyst of subnational mobilization & thus not "exclusively" linked to the public policy realm; it has increasingly become a prominent feature of other public-policy areas. And finally, hand in hand with the elaboration of the common cohesion policy (related to subnational mobilization) the concept of the so-called multilevel governance was formulated in the context of the European integration, in the sense of identifying the environment in which the processes of the formation & the implementation of common European policies are today taking place. Figures, References. Adapted from the source document.
Klimatske promjene su jedan od najvećih izazova za postizanje ciljeva održivog razvoja. Formiranje odgovarajućih institucionalnih okvira za upravljanje klimatskim promjenama, koji uključuju i koordiniraju brojne interese i aktivnosti različitih aktera, razina i sektora, problem je i za zemlje jugoistočne Europe. Bosna i Hercegovina (BiH), Hrvatska, Slovenija i Srbija imaju značajne prirodne resurse koji su bili ugroženi proteklih godina zbog prirodnih katastrofa, što je utjecalo i na sektor šumarstva. Cilj rada je proučiti institucionalne okvire u šumarstvu i zaštiti prirode, kao i stavove ispitanika o kompetencijama relevantnih institucija i organizacija, identificirati potrebe za poboljšanjem postojećeg okvira i ocijeniti njihove interese i utjecaje u procesu upravljanja klimatskim promjenama. Prikupljanje podataka provedeno je korištenjem intervjua, u razdoblju od studenog 2016. do travnja 2017. godine. Protokol za intervju sastojao se od 22 pitanja podijeljenih u pet skupina. U svrhu ovoga rada analizirani su odgovori na pitanja u vezi s institucionalnim okvirima za upravljanje klimatskim promjenama u šumarstvu i zaštiti prirode. Uzorak je činilo 29 ispitanika (Federacija BiH-8, Hrvatska-6, Slovenija-5, Srbija-10), odnosno predstavnika javnih uprava i javnih službi u šumarstvu i zaštiti prirode, poduzeća i ustanova za gospodarenje državnim šumama i upravljanje zaštićenim područjima, obrazovnih i istraživačkih organizacija te organizacija civilnog sektora. Ispitanici su odabrani probnim uzorkovanjem (uzorak na bazi vrijednosnog suda). Ispitanici su bili predstavnici institucija i organizacija na nacionalnoj razini upravljanja u šumarstvu i zaštiti prirode, koji su izravno ili neizravno povezani s problematikom klimatskih promjena u odabranim oblastima. O postojećim institucionalnim okvirima, 52,4% ispitanika nema pozitivno mišljenje, a 85,7% se zalaže za njihovo unapređenje, u smislu poboljšanja suradnje i koordinacije između različitih sektora, institucija i organizacija. Značajne su razlike u procjeni interesa i utjecaja institucija i organizacija u upravljanju klimatskim promjenama među ispitanicima iz Slovenije i Hrvatske, kao i onima iz Federacije BiH i Srbije. Ispitanici iz područja zaštite prirode procjenjuju da je interes veći u odnosu na predstavnike šumarskog sektora (ispitanici iz područja zaštite prirode smatraju da je interes "veoma visok" – prosječna ocjena 4,6, a iz sektora šumarstva da je "visok" – prosječna ocjena 4,1). Potrebna su daljnja istraživanja o suradnji i koordinaciji svih sudionika na različitim razinama upravljanja, kao i drugih elemenata koji, uz institucionalne okvire, dovode do stvaranja odgovornog sustava upravljanja klimatskim promjenama i rješavanja različitih izazova klimatskih promjena. ; Global environmental and ecological problems such as climate change and other related issues (e.g. biodiversity losses) do not recognize state boundaries. Therefore, intentions to address these problems require a multi-actor, multi-sector and multilevel approach. The concept that enables joint effort against these problems implies an active participation of all stakeholders, establishes the rules for shared responsibilities and strives to make efficient and effective procedures for addressing these issues is known as "governance" (Mutabdžija, 2012).Climate change and occurance of extreme events are presenting a threat to the natural resources, exposing the vulnerabilities of current resource governance regimes, including also forestry and nature conservation. The occurance of extreme events in last several years thretened the natural resources and impacted the forestry sector in all four selected countries of Southeast Europe (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, and Slovenia). This has provided a further arguments for understanding the institutional framework for climate change governance in forestry and nature conservation as important element in dealing with uncertanties posed by the climate change challenges on natural resources.Hence, the aim of the paper is to examine the institutional frameworks of forestry and nature conservation, as well as the attitudes of respondents about the competences of the relevant institutions and organizations, to identify the need to improve the existing framework and to evaluate their interests and impacts in climate change governance.In this research were used individual, structured interviews as a research technique in collecting the primary data. The questionnaire consisted of 22 questions, divided into 5 groups. For the purposes of this paper, responses to questions related to institutional frameworks for climate change governance in forestry and nature conservation are analyzed. The sample consisted of 29 representatives (Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina – 8, Croatia – 6, Serbia – 10, Slovenia – 5) from public administrations and services in forestry and nature conservation, enterprises and organization for forest and protected area management, educational and research organizations, and non-governmental organizations. The respondents were selected by judgemental sampling. Current institutional framework for climate change governance comprises of various institutions and organizations in all analyzed countries (Table 1). In selected countries, there is a clear division of responsibilities between public administration institutions in forestry and nature conservation (these institutions are directly or indirectly are related to forestry). There is a number of common primary objectives within the given competencies common to the same organizational category (Table 2), in all four countries. Despite current institutional and organizational variaty and competency alignment between different institutions and organizations, there is a need for further improvement of institutional framework for climate change governance through cooperation and coordination, accross different sectors, institutions and organizations, as stated by the respondents attittudes (Table 3 and 4). Respondents attitudes towards the interest and influence of institutions/organizations on climate change governance are mostly showing a visible interest but indicating challenges in providing suitable inflluence (Table 5). Also, visible discrepancy in assessment of the interest and influence of institutions and organizations on climate change governance is between the respondents from Slovenia and Croatia at one side and respondents from Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia at the other side, indicates differences in inclusion of climate change challenges accross different competency levels. Regardless of the category of institutions and organizations, the respondents recognized the importance of the investigated issues and they assessed its interest as "high" and "very high" (Table 6).Further development of suitable institutional frameworks for climate change governance in forestry and nature conservation needs additional attention especially in the field of multilevel coordination between different actors and their activities, as well as the acknowledgment of potentially significant influence forestry sector might have in climate change governance.
Negativni ishod referenduma o Ustavu Europske unije u Francuskoj i Nizozemskoj doveo je u žarište alternativu između preoblikovanja Europe u federativnu državu i njezinog zadržavanja statusa svojevrsne međunarodne organizacije. U radu se naglašava da je ta alternativa manje oštra nego što se čini. Europska je unija proces koji obje mogućnosti drži otvorenima. Europa se može istodobno razvijati i prema čvršćim strukturama u nekim područjima i prema većoj elastičnosti i prilagodljivosti u drugima: sigurnost, regulacija, javne službe, socijalna skrb, snaženje kapaciteta za ekonomsku kompeticiju, poboljšanje sposobnosti za suočavanje s globalnim izazovima. Uspoređuju se rezultati radova o upravljanju višerazinskim teritorijalnim sustavima, osobito u njemačkoj i američkoj tradiciji, u pogledu kapaciteta rješavanja problama u višerazinskim sustavima pod uvjetima pregovaranja i labave skopčanosti među razinama. U konačnici, taj je kapacitet važniji od formalnih obilježja europskog integracijskog oblika. ; The negative out come of the referenda about the European Constitution in France and the Netherlands have, apparently, put the alternative between the transformation of Europe in a federative State and its remaining an international organization in to sharper focus. The argument in this paper is that this alternative is less sharp than it might appear. The European Union is an evolving proces that keeps both alternatives open. Europe could move simultaneously towards tighter structures in some fields and towards greater elasticity and adaptivenes in others: security, regulation, public services, social benefits, increasing capacity for economic competition, better ability to face new global challenges. Work done about the govenance of multi level territorial systems, particularly in the German and American traditions, is compared from the point of view of the problem-solving capacity of multi level systems under conditions of bargaining and loose coupling among its levels. This capacity, in the final analysis, is more important than the formal attributes of the European construction.
